In short, ED documents everything that is ''wrong'' with the internet, although it does this in a style that is certainly ''one of those things that is wrong with the internet'', and proud of it. As such, it can prove quite useful in documenting memes, events on the internet and giving frank reviews (read: "scathingly horrible hatchet jobs") of popular websites. Its article on the [[heavy metal]] site metal-archives.com is more informative, accurate, and useful than the Wikipedia article, and its extensive section on DeviantART is a must for anyone who ever wonders what the fark happens at that site.

In short, ED documents everything that is ''wrong'' with the internet, although it does this in a style that is certainly ''one of those things that is wrong with the internet'', and proud of it. As such, it can prove quite useful in documenting memes, events on the internet and giving frank reviews (read: "scathingly horrible hatchet jobs") of popular websites. Its article on the [[heavy metal]] site metal-archives.com is more informative, accurate, and useful than the Wikipedia article, and its extensive section on DeviantART is a must for anyone who ever wonders what the fark happens at that site.

−

Where ED fails is mostly due to its own obsessions with [[goatse]], "over 9000", [[furry|furries]], and most of all, itself. This is hardly surprising given its membership appears to have an overlap with [[4Chan]] and [[anonymous]] - ED's article on 4Chan is quite favourable by comparison to others. Crap like Project Chanology, however, shows what can happen when it tries to direct its attention to [[Church of Scientology|genuinely deserving]] recipients. Additionally, it has articles on Conservapedia and Andrew Schlafly himself (warning: [[NSFW]]). But nothing on [[RationalWiki]], although, typing "RationalWiki" in the search box will redirect you to "TL;DR".

+

Where ED fails is mostly due to its own obsessions with [[goatse]], "over 9000", [[furry|furries]], and most of all, itself. This is hardly surprising given its membership appears to have an overlap with [[4Chan]] and [[anonymous]] - ED's article on 4Chan is quite favourable by comparison to others. Crap like Project Chanology, however, shows what can happen when it tries to direct its attention to [[Church of Scientology|genuinely deserving]] recipients. Additionally, it has articles on [[RationalWiki]], Conservapedia and Andrew Schlafly himself (warning: [[NSFW]]).

==See instead==

==See instead==

Revision as of 01:17, 22 July 2010

Encyclopædia Dramatica (ED in internet shorthand) is a wiki project that documents internet culture, memes and "drama" all for the lulz. For drama, read the epic hubris of most internet arguments and flame wars, or simply folks making tits of themselves on the internet. For the lulz, see any web discussion group with people gloating over the Patriots losing Super Bowl XLII (but not for very long because your IQ will drop rapidly). ED tends to load slowly, probably because half of the page is advertising for pornography and sex toys - the left side bar is especially impressive, although they haven't yet stooped so low as to have a link to child porn disguised as the search box.[1]

Yes, but is it art?

Although it has its moments of comedy, you can't say it's as addictive as TV Tropes, and you might indeed suffer ED saturation long before you reach your third article. Despite its main source of humour lying in its being astoundingly retarded ("on purpose"; not even people who make that claim take it seriously), it actually has its infrequent, but enjoyable, nuggets of wit here and there. It's not Jane Austen and it's not Monty Python. If you've gone there expecting either, you deserve the drop in IQ - when RationalWiki's funspace just isn't lowbrow enough, ED will certainly satisfy your needs, or break you in half and make you regret ever going there.

In short, ED documents everything that is wrong with the internet, although it does this in a style that is certainly one of those things that is wrong with the internet, and proud of it. As such, it can prove quite useful in documenting memes, events on the internet and giving frank reviews (read: "scathingly horrible hatchet jobs") of popular websites. Its article on the heavy metal site metal-archives.com is more informative, accurate, and useful than the Wikipedia article, and its extensive section on DeviantART is a must for anyone who ever wonders what the fark happens at that site.

Where ED fails is mostly due to its own obsessions with goatse, "over 9000", furries, and most of all, itself. This is hardly surprising given its membership appears to have an overlap with 4Chan and anonymous - ED's article on 4Chan is quite favourable by comparison to others. Crap like Project Chanology, however, shows what can happen when it tries to direct its attention to genuinely deserving recipients. Additionally, it has articles on RationalWiki, Conservapedia and Andrew Schlafly himself (warning: NSFW).